取得平衡?国际商业研究的金融视角

IF 2.2 4区 管理学 Q3 BUSINESS Multinational Business Review Pub Date : 2023-07-28 DOI:10.1108/mbr-06-2023-0094
Jakob Müllner, I. Filatotchev, Thomas Lindner
{"title":"取得平衡?国际商业研究的金融视角","authors":"Jakob Müllner, I. Filatotchev, Thomas Lindner","doi":"10.1108/mbr-06-2023-0094","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThe purpose of this paper is to bridge the disciplinary divide between international finance and international business (IB) to realign academic research with business reality in which strategy and finance align to determine firms’ success or failures.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThe authors discuss theoretical differences between the fields of international finance and IB strategy that caused the fields to develop in isolation with little fertilization across disciplines. The authors review scarce interdisciplinary contributions between the fields. Finally, the authors identify complementarities that suggest fruitful avenues for future research.\n\n\nFindings\nThe authors find a persistent disconnect between finance and strategy/IB literature that can be explained by fundamentally different aims and assumptions about the markets. While finance theory seeks to explain typical effects under functioning markets, strategy and IB theories focus inherently on exceptional effects and market inefficiencies.\n\n\nResearch limitations/implications\nThe fundamental theoretical differences that isolate finance and strategy/IB create avenues for interdisciplinary research that harness the complementarities of the two disciplines. These include strategic aspects of capital structure, internal capital market inefficiencies, corporate governance, capital market liability of foreignness and institutional aspects of financial management.\n\n\nPractical implications\nWith this paper, the authors not only bring academic researchers in finance and strategy closer to corporate practice. The theoretical discussion also challenges the functional blind spots of practitioners and encourages more holistic decision-making.\n\n\nSocial implications\nChallenging market functioning and recognizing market inefficiencies using strategy and IB foundations connects financial economics with non-market topics such as environment, society and governance or impact investing.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThe value and originality of the paper come from the qualitative, epistemological approach to study and analyse the divide between international finance and strategy/IB scholarship.\n","PeriodicalId":46630,"journal":{"name":"Multinational Business Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Striking a balance? Finance perspectives on international business research\",\"authors\":\"Jakob Müllner, I. Filatotchev, Thomas Lindner\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/mbr-06-2023-0094\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nPurpose\\nThe purpose of this paper is to bridge the disciplinary divide between international finance and international business (IB) to realign academic research with business reality in which strategy and finance align to determine firms’ success or failures.\\n\\n\\nDesign/methodology/approach\\nThe authors discuss theoretical differences between the fields of international finance and IB strategy that caused the fields to develop in isolation with little fertilization across disciplines. The authors review scarce interdisciplinary contributions between the fields. Finally, the authors identify complementarities that suggest fruitful avenues for future research.\\n\\n\\nFindings\\nThe authors find a persistent disconnect between finance and strategy/IB literature that can be explained by fundamentally different aims and assumptions about the markets. While finance theory seeks to explain typical effects under functioning markets, strategy and IB theories focus inherently on exceptional effects and market inefficiencies.\\n\\n\\nResearch limitations/implications\\nThe fundamental theoretical differences that isolate finance and strategy/IB create avenues for interdisciplinary research that harness the complementarities of the two disciplines. These include strategic aspects of capital structure, internal capital market inefficiencies, corporate governance, capital market liability of foreignness and institutional aspects of financial management.\\n\\n\\nPractical implications\\nWith this paper, the authors not only bring academic researchers in finance and strategy closer to corporate practice. The theoretical discussion also challenges the functional blind spots of practitioners and encourages more holistic decision-making.\\n\\n\\nSocial implications\\nChallenging market functioning and recognizing market inefficiencies using strategy and IB foundations connects financial economics with non-market topics such as environment, society and governance or impact investing.\\n\\n\\nOriginality/value\\nThe value and originality of the paper come from the qualitative, epistemological approach to study and analyse the divide between international finance and strategy/IB scholarship.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":46630,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Multinational Business Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Multinational Business Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/mbr-06-2023-0094\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Multinational Business Review","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/mbr-06-2023-0094","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文的目的是弥合国际金融和国际商业(IB)之间的学科鸿沟,以重新调整学术研究与商业现实,其中战略和财务一致,以决定公司的成功或失败。设计/方法/方法作者讨论了国际金融和IB战略领域之间的理论差异,这些差异导致了这些领域的孤立发展,几乎没有跨学科的施肥。作者回顾了这些领域之间稀少的跨学科贡献。最后,作者确定了互补性,为未来的研究提供了富有成效的途径。作者发现,金融和战略/IB文献之间存在持续的脱节,这可以通过对市场的根本不同的目标和假设来解释。金融理论试图解释运作市场下的典型效应,而战略和IB理论本质上关注的是异常效应和市场无效率。研究局限/启示孤立金融学和战略/IB的基本理论差异为利用这两个学科的互补性进行跨学科研究创造了途径。这些包括资本结构的战略方面,内部资本市场的低效,公司治理,资本市场的外国责任和财务管理的制度方面。实践意义通过本文,作者不仅使财务和战略方面的学术研究人员更接近企业实践。理论讨论也挑战实践者的功能盲点,鼓励更全面的决策。社会影响利用战略和IB基础挑战市场功能和认识市场效率低下将金融经济学与非市场主题(如环境、社会和治理或影响投资)联系起来。本文的价值和原创性来自于定性的、认识论的方法来研究和分析国际金融与战略/IB奖学金之间的差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Striking a balance? Finance perspectives on international business research
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to bridge the disciplinary divide between international finance and international business (IB) to realign academic research with business reality in which strategy and finance align to determine firms’ success or failures. Design/methodology/approach The authors discuss theoretical differences between the fields of international finance and IB strategy that caused the fields to develop in isolation with little fertilization across disciplines. The authors review scarce interdisciplinary contributions between the fields. Finally, the authors identify complementarities that suggest fruitful avenues for future research. Findings The authors find a persistent disconnect between finance and strategy/IB literature that can be explained by fundamentally different aims and assumptions about the markets. While finance theory seeks to explain typical effects under functioning markets, strategy and IB theories focus inherently on exceptional effects and market inefficiencies. Research limitations/implications The fundamental theoretical differences that isolate finance and strategy/IB create avenues for interdisciplinary research that harness the complementarities of the two disciplines. These include strategic aspects of capital structure, internal capital market inefficiencies, corporate governance, capital market liability of foreignness and institutional aspects of financial management. Practical implications With this paper, the authors not only bring academic researchers in finance and strategy closer to corporate practice. The theoretical discussion also challenges the functional blind spots of practitioners and encourages more holistic decision-making. Social implications Challenging market functioning and recognizing market inefficiencies using strategy and IB foundations connects financial economics with non-market topics such as environment, society and governance or impact investing. Originality/value The value and originality of the paper come from the qualitative, epistemological approach to study and analyse the divide between international finance and strategy/IB scholarship.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
14.80%
发文量
15
期刊介绍: Multinational Business Review publishes high quality and innovative peer-review research on the strategy, organization and performance of multinational enterprise (MNE), international business history, geography of international business, and the impact of international business on economic growth and development. The journal encourages papers that are cross-disciplinary in nature, and that address new and important issues in international business. Multinational Business Review also promotes research on under-represented regions such as Africa, Central and Eastern Europe, Latin America, and South East Asia and their MNEs, as well as under-studied topics such as the role of trade, investment and other public policies. Specific topics of interest include innovation and entrepreneurship in an international context; corporate governance and ownership; social, environmental and political risk; the role of multilateral institutions; and the nature of emerging market multinationals. The title seeks strong conceptual studies, contributing to the advancement of theories and frameworks, and sound empirical work, whether qualitative or quantitative, suggesting managerial, economic or government policy recommendations. The journal encourages replication studies that contribute to our understanding of the reliability and validity of current knowledge. Finally, Multinational Business Review welcomes proposals for perspectives pieces that offer critical and challenging viewpoints; surveys of the literature particularly those that use new and innovative bibliometric methods; and special issues on topics of relevance to Multinational Business Review.
期刊最新文献
Open strategy and the multinational firm Improving the credibility of case study research in international business studies and beyond: a simple fix for a serious problem Towards environmental impact of inward foreign direct investment: the moderating role of varieties of democracy Ownership share in cross-border acquisitions: does high-tech status of the target matter? Future directions of R&D internationalization in international business
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1